2012 TOPCO崇越論文大賞

論文題目：

Effects of Consumer Impulsivity Traits

and Option Framing on Online

Consumer Impulse Buying Intention

報名編號： _H0023_

1

ABSTRACT

With the proliferation of e-commerce, there is growing evidence that online

impulse buying is an emerging phenomenon, which has been the focus of researchers

from a variety of disciplines. This study investigates consumer impulsivity traits and

option framing effect on online consumer impulse buying intention. A 2(Impulsivity

traits: high/low) x 2(option framing: +OF/-OF) x 2(cash refund promotion level: high/

low) x 2(product type: hedonic product/utilitarian product) online experiment was

conducted. The experiment results demonstrated that subjects with high impulsivity

traits, subtractive option framing are more likely to engage in impulse buying intention.

Specifically, consistent with past online impulse buying research, price framing

manifests as an environmental cue that directly influences the likelihood that a

consumer will experience an urge to buy impulsively. In addition, the effects of

consumer impulsivity traits and option framing on consumer impulse buying intention

were moderated by cash refund promotion and product type. Theoretical and managerial

implications of these findings are provided.

Keywords：Impulsivity traits, option framing, hedonic product, utilitarian product, cash

refund promotion

2

1. INTRODUCTION

All products can be purchased impulsively, and all consumers engage in impulse

buying on occasion. Sharma et al. (2010) identify three important trait correlates of

impulse buying and variety seeking, namely, impulsiveness, optimum stimulation level,

and self-monitoring. The Internet offers a private shopping environment for consumers

that reduces the degree of self-monitoring, thus increasing the probabilities of impulse

consumption intention.

Rook (1987) stated, Impulse buying occurs when a consumer experiences a sudden,

often powerful and persistent urge to buy something immediately. The impulse to buy

may stimulate emotional conflict and is hedonically complex. Also, impulse buying is

prone to occur with diminished regard for its consequences. In the process of surfing

websites, consumers may be stimulated by shopping circumstances such as promotion

and emotion and may indulge in pure impulse buying. When consumers are on a

shopping trip, they may be reminded of situational factors, for example, if the products

on sales are on the to-buy list and the stimulus exceeds the threshold, the consumer will

make an immediate buying decision, which is called reminder impulse buying.

In online shopping, consumers cannot check the products, so the manner in which

the products are displayed to the consumers plays an important role in purchasing

decision. Framing affects people’s choices when the situations and issues differ (Zhang

& Buda, 1999). Previous studies have categorized impulse buying intention into three

types. First, studies that focus on consumers discuss the behavior traits that cause

impulse buying behavior (Rook, 1987; Rook & Fisher, 1995; Wood, 1998). Second,

studies that focus on products discuss how the products affect impulse buying

(Hausman, 2000). Last, some studies focus on situations that exceed the threshold of

consumers and cause impulse buying (Steenkamp et al., 1996; Dholakia, 2000; Puri,

1996; Shiv & Fedorikhin, 1999). To date, few studies specifically investigate the

influence of cash refund promotion on consumer impulse buying intention. Cash refund

promotion refers to situations in which consumers avail of a discount only when their

purchasing amount reaches a certain level. Stores provide cash refund promotions to

increase impulse buying and to encourage consumers to buy more products. This study

aims to examine the influence of impulsivity traits, purchasing situations (option

framing) and product type (utilitarian product/hedonic product) on impulse buying

intention. Additionally, this investigation proposes that cash refund promotions can

moderate the effects of impulsivity traits, option framing and product type on continue

impulse buying intention.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Intention Aspects of Impulse Buying

3

Previous studies suggest that impulse buying is the tendency to buy on whim or an

action with less rational decision making (Rook, 1987; Rook & Fisher, 1995; Wood,

1998). The most commonly accepted definition of impulse buying, provided by Rook

(1987), is that Impulse buying occurs when a consumer experiences a sudden, often

powerful and persistent urge to buy something immediately.

Dholakia (2000) constructs Consumption Impulse Formation and Enactment (CIFE)

and categorizes relevant factors into marketing stimulation, situation, and impulsivity

traits. Marketing stimulation includes external stimulus and the way products are

presented to the consumers, such as market environment, ads, promotion, and specific

products. A situational factor is the personal or social factor that surrounds the specific

buying environment, which can increase or decrease the intensity of the impulse buying

intention. These factors include time pressure, economic pressure, and the length of

buying lag. Impulsivity traits include normative evaluations (Rook & Fisher, 1995), the

intention of the shopping, self-control, and sexuality, which can reflect in different

consumers with different levels of impulse buying intention.

2.2 Impulsivity Traits

Some studies distinguish impulsivity traits from impulse buying “behavior.” This

article uses the same categorization: impulse buying intention represents behavior and

impulsivity traits represent traits. Rook and Fisher (1995) regard impulse buying as

careless consideration and immediate decision making. Consumers with this trait will

have more frequent and intensive impulse buying intentions. Wood (1998) believes that

the core definition of impulse is weakness of will. These kinds of consumers make

decisions using unplanned, careless thinking, often followed by affection or emotional

status. The final decisions are usually against optimal judgment.

Impulsivity traits in the literature are considered the best explanatory variables.

Consumers with high impulsivity traits will have more impulse buying than those with

low impulsivity traits (Dholakia, 2000; Puri, 1996). These kinds of consumers are

weak-willed (Wood, 1998). Compared to low impulsivity consumers, high impulsivity

consumers easily connect external information to internal emotion, incurring impulse

buying. Therefore, this study assumes that high impulsivity consumers will have more

online buying intentions than will low impulsivity consumers. Based on the above

arguments, we propose the following hypothesis:

H1. Impulsivity trait has a positive influence on impulse buying, and this relationship

is stronger for high impulsivity traits than for low impulsivity traits.

2.3 Option Framing Effect

Tversky and Kahneman (1979) propose the prospect theory, which holds that

4

people make decisions under uncertainty, which is against traditional utility theory.

Understating decisive biases replaces the assumption of rational utility theory. This

article discusses the Optimum Stimulation Level on the basis of option framing effect.

In the option framing method, the producer sends the message to the consumers using

different framing. Consumers feel that the look of the alternative will affect the

information processing and the final buying decision (Park et al., 2000; Levin et al.,

2002). They categorize selection into two types: adding desirable choice from the basic

model, known as additive option framing (+OF), and cutting the undesirable choice

from the perfect model, known as subtractive option framing (-OF). In +OF, consumers

will increase their utility by adding more choice, but they will have monetary losses; in

-OF, consumers will decrease their utility by deleting choices, but they will compensate

by saving money. Based on loss aversion theory, consumers dislike loss of utility more

than loss of money (Tversky and Kahneman, 1991). The impulse buying intention

relates to more strong emotion with very short decision time (Stern, 1962). Therefore,

the conflicts of deleting choice are larger than are those of adding choice, and

consumers face more difficulties in making decisions in -OF than in +OF, which leads

to consumer impulse buying intention.

Howard and Kerin (2006) found that consumers with different levels of

involvement, operationalized by whether they are in the market for a particular product,

have different information processing styles and hence respond to different price

promotion cues. Della Bitta et al. (1981) discussed price promotion with different types

and combined commodity and found that consumers think that regular prices with cash

discount promotions have the greatest benefits. The effect of the promotion message

framing or format is conditional on consumers’ prior purchase goals. The products

which consumers planned to buy are more responsive to promotion messaged framing

as reduction of losses (e.g., “pay less” and a discount) (Xia & Monroe, 2009). Discount

promotions focus on the discount amount, and the information processing will let them

focus on the judgment of the amount saved. Therefore, the perceived saving will be

higher than that in percentage discount. Chung et al. (2011) found that, since demand is

price-sensitive compared to price discount, the reduced price induces higher demand.

Based on the above arguments, we propose the following hypothesis:

H2a. Price framing has a positive influence on impulse buying intention, and this

relationship is stronger for subtractive option framing than for additive option

framing.

H2b. Price framing has a positive influence on impulse buying intention, and this

relationship is stronger for price reduction than for price discount.

2.4 Moderating Role of Product Type

5

The product is usually categorized according to meaning, benefits, and need from

the consumers’ point of view. The most common classification is utilitarian product and

hedonic product (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982). Park et al. (2011) suggested that web

browsing is a key factor in online impulse buying for apparel purchase from both

utilitarian and hedonic perspectives. Consumers emphasize different information

processing when they consume hedonic products and utilitarian products. For hedonic

products, consumers focus on information related to inner sensory stimuli; for utilitarian

products, consumers focus on information related to the decision itself. Hence, this

study proposes that when hedonic products focus on utility, consumers will prevent

deletion choices to have decreasing utility. On the other hand, consumers will depend

on the functions of products to add or delete items when they consume utilitarian

products, and the effect of option framing will be lower.

Dholakia (2000) believes that the impulsivity traits of consumers will affect the

impulse buying intention. When consumers’ ethical judgment of impulse buying

includes hedonism and weakness of will, they will act with more impulse buying

intention (Shiv & Fedorikhin, 1999). Consumers with high impulsivity traits have

positive emotion and high arousal and prefer hedonic products. On the other hand,

consumers with low impulsivity traits have more neutral emotion and low arousal and

prefer utilitarian products (Herabadi et al., 2009). Based on the above arguments, we

propose the following hypothesis:

H3a. Product type has a positive moderating influence on the relationship between

impulsivity traits and impulse buying intention, and this relationship is stronger

for hedonic products than for utilitarian products.

H3b. Product type has a positive moderating influence on the relationship between

option framing and impulse buying intention, and this relationship is stronger for

hedonic products than for utilitarian products.

2.5 Moderating Role of Cash Refund Promotion

Cash refund promotion is very commonly used by department stores in Taiwan

during anniversary sales. Internet stores have recently started using this method as well.

Cash refund promotion is different from normal price discount promotion in that

consumers understand that they can only have the discount after their purchasing

reaches a certain level. The stores provide an external stimulus for the cash refund

promotion that increases the intensity of the impulse buying intention and encourages

consumers to buy more products. Homburg et al. (2010) confirm that mental budgeting

is an important factor that influences a customer’s future purchase behavior. Consumers

will take expected interest and expected regret into consideration. Regret is the one

human emotion that plays a significant role in making the decision (Bell, 1982). Will

6

they regret that they gave up the cash refund promotion? Decisions are usually

combined with uncertainty, which could cause positive emotion or negative emotion.

Consumers usually select the choice they will not regret to maximize the expected

utility. Regret is considered the most important negative emotion (Inman et al. 1997).

On the other hand, the loss aversion utility for consumer will is larger than the monetary

loss (Tversky & Kahneman, 1991). This research further assumes that, in the promotion

situation, consumers will increase continue impulse buying intention during cash refund

promotion.

The most common threshold of cash refund promotions in Taiwan is “refund 500

when consumers reach 5000” and “refund 800 when consumer reaches 8000.”

Therefore, this study set the “refund 500 when consumers reach 5000” as the lower

level and “refund 800 when consumer reaches 8000” as the higher level. Consumers

have the same discount rate but different absolute amounts. Therefore, based on Chen

(1998) results, 800 is a higher absolute discount amount than 500, making it more

attractive to consumers; that is, the higher absolute discount will induce a higher

impulse urge. Besides, on the perspective of expected utility and expected regret,

consumers will consider the higher cash refund in the cash refund promotion, and

expected utility will be higher. Besides, the opportunity cost will be higher in refund

promotions at the higher level because consumers will have higher expected regret. In

summary, consumers will have higher impulse desire when they are faced with cash

refund promotion at the higher level. Based on the above arguments, we propose the

following hypothesis:

H4. Cash refund promotion has a positive moderating influence on the relationship

between impulse buying intentions and continue impulse buying intention. Cash

refund promotion at the higher level has stronger continue impulse buying

intention than that at the lower level.

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Framework

This study discusses whether, when the online store provides promotion

information, consumers with impulsivity traits will be stimulated by promotion and

whether they will therefore have impulse buying intention induced by option framing.

This study follows two stages of situation design. Considering the effects of product

type (hedonic product/ utilitarian product), intend to explore whether the impulse will

affect the impulse buying intention. When consumers experience the impulse, intend to

find out if consumers continue impulse buying intention will be affected by the

threshold of the cash refund promotion. Figure 1 shows the research framework.

7

Figure1. Research Framework

3.2 Pretest

The on-line questionnaire was designed to use an on-line survey service. The

questionnaires were obtained pretests conducted by graduate students who assess the

appropriateness of the survey questions, item clarity, and validity of constructs. The

questionnaire was pretest by 48 students. 16 groups were randomly assigned to

respondents. The Cronbach’s alphas from the pretest ranged from 0.829 to 0.883.

3.3 Manipulation checks

Following Perdue and Summers (1986), all manipulation checks were performed

during pretests. Pretests were necessary to achieve effective online manipulations. For

this pretest, a sample of 45 consumers was used. Pretest subjects were not included in

the final sample.

Subjects were asked to evaluate the nature of a set of product classes (digital

camera, earphones, iPod Nano, notebook, digital picture frame, GPS mobile phone and

robotic vacuums). For each product class, subjects were asked whether products could

either be evaluated as either a (1) hedonic product or an (2) utilitarian product. The

results of the pretest indicated that the iPod Nano was perceived as the most “hedonic”

(t=24.66, M=4.545, p<0.001) product and that the GPS mobile phone was perceived as

the most “utilitarian” product (t=13.58, M=4.5, p<0.001). The difference between the

evaluations of the two product classes was significant.

Product type

(Hedonic product/

Utilitarian product)

Impulsivity traits

(high /low)

Option framing

(+OF/-OF)

Continue impulse

buying intention

Cash refund

promotion

(Level: high/low)

Impulse buying

intention

H1

H2a

H2b

H3

a

H4

Stage 2

Stage 1

8

The purpose of a cash refund promotion is to stimulate consumers. Therefore, it is

very important to setup the refund threshold. If consumers perceive the threshold of

cash refund promotion as too high, their buying intention will decrease. On the other

hand, a threshold set too low will decrease the total benefits and increase the costs for

the seller. In practice, setting refund threshold usually refers to pricing a promoted

product very close to the lowest refund threshold so that consumers avail the cash

refund promotion scheme. The refund amount is usually set at 10% of the price in

Taiwan. In the experiment, the price of the promoted product was set as 4,500, and the

lowest threshold was 5,000 returning a refund of 500. Assuming that the price of the

target product is 4,500, instead of setting the threshold at 5,000 where a consumer can

obtain a refund of 500, the subjects preferred to set the threshold at 8,000 where a

refund of 800 can be obtained. The threshold amount in the latter case is obviously

higher but achievable (t=0.982, M=4.06, p<0.001). Thus, this study set a higher

threshold at 8,000 returning a refund of 800. The difference in the results obtained

between the two cash refund promotion levels was significant. For this pretest, a sample

of 34 consumers was used. Pretest subjects were not included in the final sample.

3.4 Measurement

This study measured the influence of consumers’ impulsiveness on their buying

intention, using a dichotomous variable. According to Rook (1995), the subjects were

categorized by sample mean as possessing either high or low impulsivity traits. The

measurement scale developed by Rook (1995) was used to assess buying impulsiveness.

Consumers experienced the impulse to buy more than one item during the simulation;

hence, they participated in experiments before completing the impulsivity traits scale

questionnaire. The buying impulsiveness scale (Rook, 1995) was used in the

beginning, with two trait-scales, followed by questions to classify the impulsivity traits

as “high” or “low.” This experiment is based on sample average (M=25.98): samples

higher than the average were classified as high impulsivity traits and the rest as low

impulsivity traits.

This study measured impulsivity traits, cash refund promotion and impulse Buying

Intention using the well-established buying impulsiveness scale (Rook, 1995), expect

utility and expect regret scale (Kacen & Lee, 2002; Lemon, 2000), and impulsive urge

scale (Luo, 2005). All scales use the five-point Likert-scale response format (ranging

from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). (See table1)

9

Table 1. Measurement Items

Variable Construct Measurement Reference

Impulsivity

Traits

Impulsivity

Traits

1. I often buy things spontaneously. Rook,

1995 2. “Just do it” describes the way I buy things.

3. I often buy things without thinking.

4. “I see it, I buy it” describes me.

5. “Buy now, think about it later” describes me.

6. Sometimes I feel like buying things on the

spur-of-the-moment.

7. I buy things according to how I feel at the

moment.

8. I carefully plan most of my purchases.

9. Sometimes I a

10. m a bit reckless about what I buy.

Impulse

Buying

Intention

Impulsive

Urge

1. In stores, I will promote to buy more because

of the discount activities.

Luo, 2005

2. When I see something that really interests me,

I buy it without considering the consequences.

3. I wanted to buy things even though they were

not on the shopping list.

Continue

Impulse

Buying

Intention

Expect

Utility and

Expect

Regret

1. You could feel regretful if you give up cash

refund promotion.

Kacen &

Lee, 2002;

Lemon,

2000

2. You will feel it is a waste if you give up cash

refund promotion as the accumulative amount

will turn to be nothing.

3. You will feel happy if you get the cash refund

promotion.

4. You will feel it will save your money if you

get cash refund promotion.

5. Cash refund promotion will incur your

continuous buying desire when shopping.

3.5 Experiment of Design

This study employed a 2(impulsivity traits: high/low) x2(option framing: +OF/-OF)

x 2(cash refund promotion level: high/low) x 2(product type: hedonic product/utilitarian

product) experiment. Table 2 shows the 16 experimental conditions that were generated.

10

Table 2. Experiment of Design

Group Impulsivity traits Cash refund promotion Product type Option framing

1 n=56

High

Low

Hedonistic +OF

2 n =50 -OF

3 n=49 Utilitarian +OF

4 n=42 -OF

5 n=47

High

Hedonistic +OF

6 n=45 -OF

7 n=44 Utilitarian +OF

8 n=46 -OF

9 n=48

Low

Low

Hedonistic +OF

10 n=49 -OF

11 n=44 Utilitarian +OF

12 n=45 -OF

13 n=50

High

Hedonistic +OF

14 n=47 -OF

15 n=49 Utilitarian +OF

16 n=49 -OF

Note: n= number

3.6 Sampling Design and Procedure

The subjects are those who have experienced online shopping. Hence, at the

beginning of the questionnaire, we ask the interviewee whether they have had the

experience of online shopping. If not, we end the survey. Subjects were randomly

assigned to one of 16 groups. The experiment was designed to resemble a promotion

activity on the occasion of the anniversary of an online department store. Consumers

intend to take the opportunity to buy the products on sale. After reading about the

scenario, participants completed a questionnaire on measures and manipulation checks.

First, the well-established consumer impulsiveness scale (Rook, 1995) was used to

measure the impulsivity traits of testers. The actual website follows two stages of

situation design. In the stage 1, subjects who entered the website on account of the

promotion were taken to a cash refund promotion web page. Two different promotion

web pages displayed the same products, and subjects were asked to express their

impulse buying intention after viewing the promotion information. One page showed a

price discount and the other page showed a price reduction. The price discount package

offers 10% off, while the price reduction package offers a reduction of 500 Taiwan

dollars. The website promotion products were categorized as either hedonic product

11

(iPod Nano) or utilitarian product (GPS mobile phone). In Stage 2, regret and expected

utility were used to measure whether the cash refund promotion increases the impulse

buying intention. Based on (1) the level of regret and waste that consumers feel when

they give up buying and cash refund promotion and (2) the level of delight and

fulfillment that consumers feel when they continue buying to avail of a cash refund

promotion, we can measure cash refund promotion that might stimulate the intention to

buy continuously. Finally, five major demographic variables are considered in this study:

gender, age, education, occupation, and monthly income.

4. RESEARCH RESULTS

4.1 Data Collection

The survey was conducted online (http://www.mysurvey.tw/), and the subjects

were consumers with online shopping experience. The sample includes users of

Facebook and PTT who have online shopping experience. In order to improve the

effectiveness of the sample, participants were given the chance to receive 7–11 coupons

by randomly selecting emails. Participants from PTT were given the chance to receive

P-chips (PTT virtual money). Seven hundred and sixty online consumers (362 male and

398 female) completed this survey.

4. 2 Characteristics of Respondents

The characteristics of the respondents, including the five major factors considered

in this study: gender, age, education, occupation and monthly income. The majority of

subjects were between the ages of 26 and 30 years (44.9%). More than 76.7% of the

respondents were university and college students. Additionally, all of the respondents

have online shopping experience. Approximately 35.3% of the respondents have online

shopping experience at least three years.

The online shopping experience of respondents, including five major items

considered by this study, as follows: have online shopping experience or not, experience

of online shopping, frequency of surfing online shopping website, frequency of online

consumption, and average expense of online shopping. All of the respondents have

online shopping experience. Approximately 35.3% of the respondents have at least three

years of online shopping experience. More than 25.9% of the respondents surf online

shopping websites every week. About 38.6% of the respondents are consuming online

every month. Finally, more than 40.3% of the respondents spend NT 1001–2000 during

each online shopping experience.

4.3 Measurement Results for Research Variables

To test the various hypotheses, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test

12

main and interaction effects. In reliability analysis, all measures reveal Cronbach’s

alphas as being well above the suggested limit of 0.7 (Churchill, 1979). The results from

a pretest (N=48) and from the experiment (N=740) both showed that the measurement

scale is reliable. The Cronbach’s alphas from 0.886 to 0.918 for the experiment.

To test all the hypotheses, it is necessary to compare the analysis of variance of

impulsivity traits, option framing, product type, cash refund promotion, and their

interaction terms for impulse buying intention. Hence, this study tested one-way

ANOVA for impulse buying intention. In the stage 1, the mean scores for the

impulsivity traits, option framing, Product type and the three interaction terms as

independent variables; the proportions of items purchased on impulse buying intention

are the dependent variables. In stage 2, the mean scores for the cash refund promotion

and the interaction terms as independent variables; the proportions of items purchased

on continue impulse buying intention are the dependent variables. Table 3 shows the

output for the analysis of variance.

Table 3. ANOVA Analysis Results

Dependent variable Independent variables MS F-value p-value

Impulse buying

intention

(price discount)

Impulsivity traits 183.849 223.930*** .000

Option framing 148.349 180.690*** .000

Product type 35.619 43.384*** .000

Impulsivity traits x Option framing 2.759 3.361 .067

Impulsivity traits x Product type 6.290 7.661** .006

Option framing x Product type 8.234 10.029** .002

Impulsivity traits x Option framing

x Product type

3.307 4.028* .045

Impulse buying

intention

(price reduction)

Impulsivity traits 169.890 204.594*** .000

Option framing 60.571 72.944*** .000

Product type 29.006 34.931*** .000

Impulsivity traits x Option framing 1.790 2.155 .142

Impulsivity traits x Product type 4.200 5.059* .025

Option framing x Product type 4.366 5.258* .022

Impulsivity traits x Option framing

x Product type

4.363 5.254* .022

Continue impulse

buying intention

Cash refund promotion 2.148 9.505** .002

Impulse buying intention (price

discount) x Cash refund promotion

0.503 2.343* .006

Impulse buying intention (price 0.502 2.223* .012

13

reduction) x Cash refund

promotion

*P < .05, **P <.01, ***P <.001

4.4 Hypothesis Testing

4.4.1 Impulsivity Traits, Product Type and Option Framing

The ANOVA analysis showed the main effect of impulsivity traits and option

framing. As the results show, impulsivity traits (Fprice discount=267.346, p<0.001; Fprice

reduction=249.009, p<0.001), option framing (Fprice discount=203.546, p<0.001; Fprice reduction=

84.201, p<0.001) and product type (Fprice discount=69.347, p<0.001; Fprice reduction=42.759,

p<0.001) are all significant. Meanwhile, among the impulsivity traits, high impulsivity

traits (Mprice discount=3.76, Mprice reduction=4.01) have more impulse buying intention than do

low impulsivity traits (Mprice discount=2.738, Mprice reduction=3.15). Thus, H1 was supported.

Regarding option framing, subtractive option framing (Mprice discount=3.738, Mprice

reduction=3.775) causes more impulse buying intention than does additive option framing

(Mprice discount=2.863, Mprice reduction=3.218). Thus, H2a was supported. On the other hand,

regarding promotion by price discount (M=3.299), price reduction (M=3.495) has a

greater influence on impulse buying intention. Thus, H2b was supported. Regarding

option framing, subtractive option framing (Mprice discount=3.738, Mprice reduction=3.775)

causes more impulse buying intention than does additive option framing (Mprice

discount=2.863, Mprice reduction=3.218). Thus, H2a was supported.

4.4.2 The Effects of Impulsivity Traits and Product Type on Impulse Buying

Intention

The interaction between consumer impulsivity traits and product type is significant

(Fprice discount=7.661, p<0.01; Fprice reduction=5.059, p<0.05) Therefore, product type will

affect subjects who have impulsivity traits and impulse buying intention. Figures 2(a)

and 2(b) show that different levels of impulsivity traits have different impulse buying

intentions in different demonstrations (price discount and price reduction). Compared to

utilitarian product, hedonic product has a greater effect on impulsivity traits and impulse

buying intention. Thus, H3a was supported.

14

Figure 2(b). Impulsivity traits x product type for

impulse buying intention.

Figure 2(a). Impulsivity traits x product type for

impulse buying intention.

4.4.3 The Effects of Option Framing and Product Type on Impulse Buying

Intention

The interaction between option framing and product type are significant (Fprice

discount=10.029, p<0.05; Fprice reduction=5.258, p<0.05). Therefore, product type will affect

subjects who have impulse buying intention as a result of option framing. Figures 3(a)

and 3(b) show that different levels of option framing have different impulse buying

intentions in different demonstrations (price discount and price reduction). Compared to

utilitarian product, hedonic product has a greater effect on option framing and impulse

buying intention. Thus, H3b was supported.

Figure 3(a). Option framing x product type for

impulse buying intention.

Figure 3(b). Option framing x product type for

impulse buying intention.

15

4.4.4 The Effects of Impulse Buying Intention and Cash Refund Promotion on

Continue Impulse Buying Intention

The interactions between impulse buying intention and cash refund promotion are

significant (Fprice discount=2.343, p<0.01; Fprice reduction=2.223, p<0.05). Therefore, cash

refund promotion will affect subjects who have impulse buying intention and cash

refund promotion on continue impulse buying intention. Compared to the lower level

cash refund promotion (M =4.075), the higher level promotions (M=4.39) have a greater

effect on impulse buying intention and continue impulse buying intention. Thus, H4

was supported.

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Discussion

In summary, impulsivity traits will affect impulse buying intention. High

impulsivity traits will result in stronger impulse buying intention than will low

impulsivity traits (H1). This presents results consistent with past literature (Dholakia,

2000; Puri, 1996). The participants in this study indicate that when they face promotion

situations, the impulse buying intention is by impulsivity traits, which further increase

impulse buying intention. Therefore, when online store provide cash refund promotions,

consumers with high impulsivity traits will be affected more easily and will increase

their continue impulse buying intention . Products are categorized as hedonic products

and utilitarian products. For utilitarian products, consumers will depend on the usage of

the product; for hedonic products, they will depend on multiple senses to experience the

product, which will create a fantasy and interest. Compare to consumers with low

impulsivity traits, consumers with high impulsivity traits are more sensitive, easily

affected by product appearance, and fashion conscious. Therefore, consumers with high

impulsivity traits, when viewing hedonic products, make spontaneous purchases and

increase their impulse buying intention (H3a).

Option framing will affect impulse buying intention, and -OF will result in stronger

impulse buying intention than will +OF (H2a). This study, which is based on past study,

discusses the representation method of impulse buying intention. Given the same

discount amount, price reduction and price discount will be perceived differently (as

getting and giving) by consumers. Consumers need to consider the benefits they get

from the price discount, but they fully understand the highest interest in the price

reduction promotion. With more time, consumers can think rationally. In impulse

buying, consumers do not have too much time to consider the relevant information and

the decision-making time is quite short. Price discount promotions decrease the time

spent thinking, so price reduction will lead easily to more impulse buying than will

price discount (H2b). From the perspective of product type, compared to utilitarian

16

products, hedonic products are easily affected by option framing, leading to impulse

buying intention (H3b). When buying utilitarian products, consumers will consider the

usage of the product. Hedonic products are based on joy and fun, so consumers make

buying decisions based on the highest utility. Besides, consumers consider both price of

product and cash refund promotion. Although the two cases of “refund 500 when

consumer reaches 5000” and “refund 800 when consumer reaches 8000” are both 10%

discount savings, consumers will perceive them differently. Consumers will consider

that if they give up buying more, they will lose 800 or 500. Consumers will base their

decision on expected regret and benefits and will continue buying to meet the

requirement of the cash refund promotion. The level of regret will be higher in the 800

case than in the 500 one. This paper shows that cash refund promotion urges consumers

to prevent regret for not buying, leading to continue impulse buying intention.

When online store want to increase sales and stimulate consumers to buy in a very

short period, they use promotions in most cases. This study shows that, in short-term

promotions, to build the promotion environment in the market and to provide relevant

price promotion is the best way to incur impulse buying in consumers.

5.2 Research Conclusion

We found that in online promotion situation manipulation, given the same discount

amount, consumers experience more impulse stimulus from price reduction promotion

than from price discount promotion. Besides, there will be higher impulse buying in the

promotion combined commodity of “-OF and hedonic products” and “-OF and cash

refund promotion at a higher level.” In other words, hedonic products with whole

package promotion and whole package combined commodity with cash refund

promotion at the higher threshold can increase the impulse buying of consumers and

provide higher benefits to sellers. Considering impulsivity traits in the experiment, we

found that impulsivity traits depend on preferences for promotion and products. Based

on the experiment, consumers with high impulsivity traits will have higher impulse

buying intention than will those with low impulsivity traits. Consumers have unique and

specific optimal stimulation levels, meaning that the stimulus differs according to

person. Compared to consumers with low impulsivity traits, “-OF and hedonic product”

will have higher utility to consumers with high impulsivity traits; “-OF and cash refund

promotion at a higher level” will have higher situational stimulus for consumers with

high impulsive traits.

5.3 Managerial Implications

Promotion, from the very beginning until the sales, is one of the important

elements in marketing. Hence, many sellers use various promotional strategies such as

refunds, price variations, or product bundling.

17

The results of our study indicate that, compared to consumers with low impulsivity

traits, those with high impulsivity traits experience impulse buying intentions more

easily. In case an online store provides situational stimulus through promotional

schemes, consumers with low impulsivity traits experience an increase in their impulse

buying intentions. After viewing sellers’ websites, consumers with low impulsivity traits

rely on the promotional price and cash refund promotion to rationalize their impulse

buying intentions. Therefore, promotion inside a online store could evoke impulse

buying intention in consumers with high impulsivity traits as well as those with low

impulsivity traits.

In the past, online stores have used basic option framing (+OF), in which

consumers can buy additional promoted products when paying. However, this kind of

sale lacks customization and does not maximize profits. Further, online stores can

identify competitive products and promote them together as limited products; moreover,

a hedonistic product and a utilitarian product can be combined and promoted as one

commodity. This study shows that, in case hedonistic, basic (+OF), and completed (-OF)

products have the same price, consumers will have a higher impulse intention to

purchase –OF. In case of a utilitarian product, consumers focus on the function of the

product, and the option framing effect is not significant. Therefore, this study suggests

that online stores should market complete (-OF) and hedonistic products. With regard to

price setting, online stores should use discount schemes cautiously to prevent

consumers from questioning the value of the product. The study shows that, in case two

products have the same price at the time of promotion, the discounted product will

evoke a higher impulse buying intention than the product whose price was reduced.

On the other hand, if the promotion is limited to a price discount, its positive effect

on sales will be limited as well. Since consumers can get lower prices on their desired

products, they will not consider buying other products at the same time. This study

shows that cash refund promotion evokes higher impulse buying intention, which

increases a consumer’s intention to continue to buy. It suggests that online stores should

offer multiple refund threshold levels when they embark upon a cash refund promotion,

such as refunding 500 when consumers purchase products worth 5,000, and 800, when

they shop for 8,000. This approach provides multiple choices to consumers. Moreover,

online stores should also consider the relationship between refund threshold and price.

Different cash refund promotional levels should correspond to different product values,

which can prevent consumers from perceiving the refund threshold as too high to reach.

This study proves that, in dual-level cash refund promotion, a higher level will evoke a

higher impulse buying intention in consumers. Hence, an online store can create

multiple levels of refund thresholds to increase the probability that consumers will

continue to browse in the online store and spend more.

18

When marketing personnel consider promotion, they should ensure that they

increase short-term sales without doing harm to the brand name. This study suggests

that marketing personnel create promotions according to the following steps. First,

promote product type and provide promotion combined commodity or product

assortment (-OF) to increase the utility and stimulate the impulse buying intention of

consumers. Second, create a conditional promotion threshold and provide promotion

step-by-step; that is, besides the product promotion itself, consumers can have a cash

refund if they reach a specific amount. The Internet changes the model of consumption.

Although the online market achieves more than 10% growth each year, the schemes on

the anniversary of an online store do not create the same promotion power as

department stores promotion. Online prices are transparent, as the online shopper can

compare prices easily. Hence, if a seller wants to attract online consumers on its

anniversary through promotion schemes, it can offer a major product and a higher

refund in the promotion.

5.4 Limitations and Future Research

Some constraints and suggestions for future research have been listed below. First,

this study is based on an internal survey and it does not consider external factors. Hence,

there is an internal validity issue. Future studies can use different methods to explore

this subject. Second, this study focuses only on 3C products and is limited to two target

products. Future studies can focus on different products and can study consumer

impulse buying intention in more detail. Finally, future studies can discuss option

framing applied to online products and other factors that interact with a consumer’s

impulse degree.

REFERENCES

Bell, D. E. (1982). Regret in decision marketing under uncertainty. Operation Research,

30(5), 961-981.

Chen, S. F. S., Monroe, K. B., & Lou, Y. C. (1998). The effects of framing price

promotion messages on consumers’ perceptions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 353-372.

Chung, W., Talluri, S., & Narasimhan, R. (2011). Price markdown scheme in a multi-

echelon supply chain in a high- tech industry. European Journal of Operational

Research, 215, 581–589.

Churchill Jr, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing

constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64–73.

Della Bitta, A. J., Monroe, K.B., & McGinnis, J.M. (1981). Consumer perceptions of

comparative price advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(4), 416-427.

Dholakia, U. M. (2000). Temptation and resistance: An integrated model of

19

consumption Impulse formation and enactment. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11),

955-982.

Hausman, A. (2000). A multi-method investigation of consumer motivations in impulse

buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5), 403-419.

Herabadi, A. G., Verplanken, B., & Knippenberg, A. V. (2009). Consumption

experience of impulse buying in Indonesia: Emotional arousal and hedonistic

considerations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 20-31.

Homburg, C., Koschate, N., & Totzek, D. (2010). How price increases affect future

purchases: The role of mental budgeting, income, and framing. Psychology &

Marketing, 27(1), 36-53.

Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption:

Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132-140.

Howard, D. J., & Kerin, R. A. (2006). Broadening the scope of reference price

advertising research: A field study of consumer shopping involvement. Journal of

Marketing, 70, 185-204.

Inman, J. J., Dyer, J. S., & Jia, J. (1997). A generalized utility model of disappointment

and regret effects on post-choice valuation. Marketing Science, 16(2), 97-111.

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under

risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-292.

Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28,

107-128.

Lemon, K. N., White, T. B., & Winer, R. S. (2002). Dynamic customer relationship

management: Incorporating future considerations into the service retention decision.

The Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 1-14.

Levin, I. P., Schnittjer, S. K., & Thee, S. L. (1988). Information framing effects in

social and personal decisions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24(6),

520–529.

Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A

typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human

Decision Processes, 76(2), 149-188.

Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schneider, J., & Lauriola, M. (2002). A new look at framing

effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of

effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 88(1), 411- 429.

Luo, X. (2005). How does shopping with others influence impulsive purchasing?

Journal of Consumer psychology, 15(4), 288-294.

Park, C. W., Jun, S. Y., & MacInnis, D. J. (2000). Choosing what I want versus rejecting

what I do not want: An application of decision framing to product option choice

20

decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), 187-202.

Park, E. J., Kim, E. Y., Funches, V. M., & William, F. (2011). Apparel product

attributes, web browsing, and e-impulse buying on shopping websites. Journal of

Business Research, in press.

Perdue, B. C., & Summers, J. O. (1986). Checking the success of manipulations in

marketing experiments. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(4), 317–326.

Puri, R. (1996). Measuring and modifying consumer impulsiveness: A cost-benefit

accessibility framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5(2), 87- 113.

Rook, D. W. (1987). The Buying impulse. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(2),

189-199.

Rook, D. W., & Fisher, R. J. (1995). Normative influences on impulsive buying

behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 305-313.

Sharma, P., Sivakumarn, B., & Marshall, R. (2010). Impulse buying and variety seeking:

A trait-correlates perspective. Journal of Business Research, 63, 276-283.

Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: Interplay of affect and

cognition in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 278-282.

Steenkamp, J. B. E. M., Baumgartner, H., & Wulp, E. (1996). The relationships among

arousal potential, arousal and stimulus evaluation, and the moderating role of need for

stimulation, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13, 319-329.

Stern, H. (1962). The significance of impulse buying today. The Journal of Marketing,

26(2), 59-62.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-

dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 1039-1061.

Wood, M. (1998). Socio-economic status, delay of gratification, and impulse buying.

Journal of Economic Psychology, 19, 295-320.

Xia, L., & Monroe, K. B. (2009). The influence of pre-purchase goals on consumers’

perceptions of price promotions. International Journal of Retail & Distribution

Management, 37(8), 680-694.

Zhang, Y., & Buda, R. (1999). Moderating effects of need for cognition on responses to

positively versus negatively framed advertising message. Journal of Advertising, 28(2),

1-15.